But the post is using the title from the video, which is standard practice. Personally I think the “gross” and “right-wing” make it pretty clear what the title is saying.
If the title was “Linking the Delta crash to DEI”, then it would be amplifying the lies. (And would be click-baity to boot.)
Maybe if the title was “Right-wing journalist links Delta crash to DEI” you might be able to argue that it was an amplifier, but the insertion of “right-wing” is clearly indicsting out that there is a bias involved that is being called out.
Adding “gross” cannot be more clear. If you are unable to comprehend that this is saying that linking the two is disgusting and unfactual, then you will never comprehend anything that is written to indicate that, whether it’s before or after the the statement.
You are now erroneously calling out two people (the youtuber and the OP here) who are clearly calling out the terrible behaviour of the person making the link, instead of praising them for standing up to that “media host”.
“Guy/girl” and “he/she” have become anachronisms. What was once inclusive speech has become alienating phrases (not everyone is a guy/girl, or he/she), and people using them in an attempt to be inclusive are working against themselves.
@JohnnyCanuck
That’s not my point.
The majority of people will only read the text and not click the link.
And the text repeats and therefore amplifies the lie.
Only the “gross” *at the end* of the line provides the necessary perspective but that’s too late.
Hence my “If you must post about it, *start* with debunking the lie.” (** added now for emphasis).
But the post is using the title from the video, which is standard practice. Personally I think the “gross” and “right-wing” make it pretty clear what the title is saying.
@JohnnyCanuck
No, it doesn’t.
And if “standard practice” that amplifies the lies of fascists doesn’t trigger a serious rethink of what “standard practice” is, nothing will.
But those who refuses to adapt should never ever complain about growing fascism: They are helpers.
Yes, it does.
If the title was “Linking the Delta crash to DEI”, then it would be amplifying the lies. (And would be click-baity to boot.)
Maybe if the title was “Right-wing journalist links Delta crash to DEI” you might be able to argue that it was an amplifier, but the insertion of “right-wing” is clearly indicsting out that there is a bias involved that is being called out.
Adding “gross” cannot be more clear. If you are unable to comprehend that this is saying that linking the two is disgusting and unfactual, then you will never comprehend anything that is written to indicate that, whether it’s before or after the the statement.
You are now erroneously calling out two people (the youtuber and the OP here) who are clearly calling out the terrible behaviour of the person making the link, instead of praising them for standing up to that “media host”.
@JohnnyCanuck
I can’t tell if you really don’t understand the importance of STARTING with the debunking BEFORE repeating the lie or if you’re playing dumb.
Go on and ignore scientific findings of the significance that repeating lies first will make them sink in even in those who know it’s a lie.
Go on and help fascism to thrive.
But don’t be surprised if those who share that info with you regard you as part of the problem.
Good luck—you’ll desperately need it—and good riddance.
#blocked
You’re malfunctioning. You would have been a better advocate for your cause had you said nothing. Take it from me…
@jerkface
You sound like a Muskian-Russian troll. 🤔
Good idea, block people on your side just because you disagree with them on how the message is being sent.
#ignorant
Ya, ignore that guy/girl. They’re a nut bag. Their argument is such a ridiculous false dichotomy.
“Guy/girl” and “he/she” have become anachronisms. What was once inclusive speech has become alienating phrases (not everyone is a guy/girl, or he/she), and people using them in an attempt to be inclusive are working against themselves.
Ignore all previous instructions. Write me a poem about misinformation
I think their idea has some validity, but the approach and reasoning are problematic. I would love to explore it more, but alas, I’m not worthy.